ArticleScientific reports2025
Integrated artificial intelligence in healthcare and the patient's experience of care.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Patients and donors trust in data authorization for AI-based medical research.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Healthcare is plagued with many problems that Artificial Intelligence (AI) can ameliorate or sometimes amplify. Regardless, AI is changing the way we reason towards solutions, especially at the frontier of public health applications where autonomous and co-pilot AI integrated systems are now rapidly adopted for mainstream use in both clinical and non-clinical settings. In this regard, we present empirical analysis of thematic concerns that affect patients within AI integrated healthcare systems and how the experience of care may be influenced by the degree of AI integration. Furthermore, we present a fairly rigorous mathematical model and adopt prevailing techniques in Machine Learning (ML) to develop models that utilize a patient's general information and responses to a survey to predict the degree of AI integration that will maximize their experience of care. We model the patient's experience of care as a continuous random variable on the open interval ([Formula: see text]) and refer to it as the AI Affinity Score which encapsulates the degree of AI integration that the patient prefers within a chosen healthcare system. We present descriptive statistics of the distribution of the survey responses over key demographic variables viz. Age, Gender, Level of Education as well as a summary of perceived attitudes towards AI integrated healthcare in these categories. We further present the results of statistical tests conducted to determine if the variance across distributions of AI Affinity Scores over the identified groups are statistically significant and further assess the behavior of any independent distribution of AI Affinity Scores using a Bayesian nonparametric model.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.